Warmers are Neurotic Basket Cases

[abu afak]

No. I insist. Let’s have you mindlessly repeat this consensus shit when the point has been made that “consensus” in science is not what governs. Please. Go right ahead. Very persuasive. More. More.

As I said on Page Eight in This thread that is Incorrect.
Many/Most here certainly saw it but No one could reply to that post.
YOU posted !!SEVEN times!! on that page but were Mum.
Again:

Vaccines are also a Consensus. About the same in percent as AGW among specialists in the field.
They work.
Their benefit outweighs their side effects and the few anti-vaxxers/deniers.
One CAN find a few articles/studies about the evils of C19 vaccine (and AGW), but it's a strong consensus they are a positive.

Science works BY consensus.
Scientific Theories are Not proven, they are affirmed by consistent observations over time.
AGW, Atomic theory, Evolution, etc.

And of course Climate scientists are Not "Neurotic basket cases," the Trolling OP.


Pre-Sig: I Post ON TOPIC.
To the degree your post is I thank you.
But I will do my best to embarrass and put down One-line or Insult-only trolls due to the Lack of moderation on USMB. (Home OF the RW trolls.. perhaps 70%)

`

 

[ding]

There is no evidence for that

The data says otherwise, dummy.

 

[Vegasgiants]

The data says otherwise, dummy.
View attachment 634007

No it doesnt.

Climate Change Evidence: How Do We Know?

The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia.

climate.nasa.gov

 

[BackAgain]

American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2019)6

Still irrelevant. Akin to “4 out of 5 oceanographers recommend sugarless gum.”

 

[ding]

No it doesnt.

Climate Change Evidence: How Do We Know?

The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia.

climate.nasa.gov

Within 30 years everything you believe will be proven wrong by colder temperatures because the earth's land configuration makes the planet subject to more frequent and severe climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainty.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Still irrelevant. Akin to “4 out of 5 oceanographers recommend sugarless gum.”

Your opinion is noted and dismissed

 

[Vegasgiants]

Within 30 years everything you believe will be proven wrong by colder temperatures because the earth's land configuration makes the planet subject to more frequent and severe climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainty.

I predict your predictions suck

 

[ding]

I predict your predictions suck

Can you not see how the climate fluctuates?

 

[Vegasgiants]

Can you not see how the climate fluctuates?

View attachment 634008

So what?


Now it's due to AGW

 

[ding]

So what?


Now it's due to AGW

Incorrect. It's due to changes in solar irradiance and albedo.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Incorrect. It's due to changes in solar irradiance and albedo.

Uh......nope

 

[ding]

Uh......nope

Ice core data from Greenland says otherwise.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Ice core data from Greenland says otherwise.

View attachment 634009

No it doesnt

 

[BackAgain]

As I said on Page Eight in This thread that is Incorrect.
Many/Most here certainly saw it but No one could reply to that post.
YOU posted !!SEVEN times!! on that page but were Mum.
Again:

Vaccines are also a Consensus. About the same in percent as AGW among specialists in the field.
They work.
Their benefit outweighs their side effects and the few anti-vaxxers/deniers.
One CAN find a few articles/studies about the evils of C19 vaccine (and AGW), but it's a strong consensus they are a positive.

Science works BY consensus.
Scientific Theories are Not proven, they are affirmed by consistent observations over time.
AGW, Atomic theory, Evolution, etc.

And of course Climate scientists are Not "Neurotic basket cases," the Trolling OP.


Pre-Sig: I Post ON TOPIC.
To the degree your post is I thank you.
But I will do my best to embarrass and put down One-line or Insult-only trolls due to the Lack of moderation on USMB. (Home OF the RW trolls.. perhaps 70%)

`

Consensus doesn’t govern science. If I repeat it SEVEN TIMES!!! maybe you’ll begin to grasp that you’re wrong. But I’m not optimistic.

I honestly suggest you read something with (for once) an open mind: Michael Crichton explains why there is 'no such thing as consensus science' | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

 

[Vegasgiants]

Consensus doesn’t govern science. If I repeat it SEVEN TIMES!!! maybe you’ll begin to grasp that you’re wrong. But I’m not optimistic.

I honestly suggest you read something with (for once) an open mind: Michael Crichton explains why there is 'no such thing as consensus science' | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

He wrote fiction. Lol

 

[ding]

No it doesnt

I just showed you that ice core data shows that it does. What do you think caused these climate fluctuations?

 

[Vegasgiants]

I just showed you that ice core data shows that it does. What do you think caused these climate fluctuations?

View attachment 634010

No you didnt. You didnt post a link to a peer reviewed study anywhere

 

[BackAgain]

He wrote fiction. Lol

He also noted historical facts which you can’t address, so, as usual, you resort to fallacy.

 

[BackAgain]

I bet you think Jurassic park was real. Lol

I bet you think cloning is just science fiction. Note: I said cloning not the cloning of dinosaurs. But for that matter, I’ll bet you rule out even the possibility of such scientific progress.

 

[ding]

No you didnt. You didnt post a link to a peer reviewed study anywhere

Does that mean you can't tell me what cause these climate fluctuations?